[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#1041440: marked as done (popularity-contest: Non Debian - non Deb packages should be able to be reported - packages missing from Debian)

Your message dated Thu, 27 Feb 2025 11:48:38 +0100
with message-id <Z8BBR4FRFtKTiWhb@seventeen>
and subject line Re: Bug#1041440: popularity-contest: Non Debian - non Deb packages should be able to be reported - packages missing from Debian
has caused the Debian Bug report #1041440,
regarding popularity-contest: Non Debian - non Deb packages should be able to be reported - packages missing from Debian
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
1041440: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1041440
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: popularity-contest
Version: 1.76
Severity: wishlist

While popcon seems a good idea - it seems that data from repository downloads would do much the same job. 
What would be even more important is gathering statistics on non Debian and even non Deb package software installed.

I would imagine a setting to identify locations of non Debian executables so such data could be collected.

There is a pseudo-package bug - wnpp - that almost no one uses, but I would think that statistics on what 
is missing from Debian would be quite important.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: 12.0
  APT prefers stable-updates
  APT policy: (990, 'stable-updates'), (990, 'stable-security'), (990, 'stable'), (500, 'oldstable-updates')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 6.1.0-10-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU threads; PREEMPT)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE not set
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

Versions of packages popularity-contest depends on:
ii  debconf [debconf-2.0]  1.5.82
ii  dpkg                   1.21.22

Versions of packages popularity-contest recommends:
ii  cron [cron-daemon]                         3.0pl1-162
ii  exim4-daemon-light [mail-transport-agent]  4.96-15
ii  gpg                                        2.2.40-1.1

Versions of packages popularity-contest suggests:
ii  anacron   2.3-36
pn  tor       <none>
pn  torsocks  <none>

-- debconf information:
* popularity-contest/participate: true
  popularity-contest/submiturls:

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 04:20:08PM -0500, Karl Schmidt wrote:
> Package: popularity-contest
> Version: 1.76
> Severity: wishlist
> 
> While popcon seems a good idea - it seems that data from repository downloads would do much the same job. 

Not really. First it is not possible to count all sources of Debian packages, including syste images,
and it would not tell whether a package is used or not.

> What would be even more important is gathering statistics on non Debian and even non Deb package software installed.

We track .deb that are not in a Debian release already.

> I would imagine a setting to identify locations of non Debian executables so such data could be collected.

Well, this falls squarely outside the scope of popularity-contest.

Cheers,
Bill.

--- End Message ---
Reply to: